We hate AI because it's everything we hate

Comments

• just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  We hate it because it’s not what the marketing says it is. It’s a product that the rich are selling to remove the masses from the labor force, only to benefit the rich. It literally has no other productive use for society aside from this one thing.

  source

  • CosmoNova@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    I would even hate it if it was exactly how it is marketed. Because what it is often marketed for is really stupid and often vague. The fact that it doesn‘t even remotely work like they say just makes me take it a lot less seriously.

    source
  • Diurnambule@jlai.lu ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    And it falsely make people think it can replace qualified workers.

    source

    • Valmond@lemmy.world ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      And it falsely makes people think it can make art.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • serg@mastodon.au ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    @just_another_person @corbin and it will inevitably turn into enshittified disaster when they start selling everyone's data (which is inevitable).

    source

    • CosmoNova@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      The „companion“ agents children in the 2020s and onward are growing up with and trust more than their parents will start advertising them pharmaceuticals when they‘re grown up :)

      source
    • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      1. they’ve already stolen everything
      2. other companies already focus on illegally using data for “AI” means, and they’re better at it
      3. Everyone already figured out that LLMs aren’t what they were promising “Assistant” features were 15 years ago
      4. None of these companies have any sort of profit model. There is no “AI” race to win, unless it’s about who gets to fleece the public for their money faster.
      5. Tell me who exactly benefits when AGI is attainable (and for laymen it’s not a real thing achievable with this tech at all), so who in the fuck are you expecting to benefit from this in the long run?

      source
  • Melvin_Ferd@lemmy.world ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    You had it because the media which is owned by the rich told you to hard it so that they can horde it themselves while you champion laws to prevent lower class from using and embracing it. AI haters are class traitors

    source

    • Diurnambule@jlai.lu ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      Loool, yeah that know that the ruling class like to give tools to fight them. If this would really hurt them, this would be forbidden.

      source
    • just_another_person@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Lol, right, that’s why. All the people in here are wrong, but you’ve got the right take 🤣

      source
    • TheBat@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      dbzero is that way ----->

      source
• KnitWit@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Someone on bluesky reposted this image from user @yeetkunedo that I find describes (one aspect of) my disdain for AI.

  Image

  Text reads: Generative Al is being marketed as a tool designed to reduce or eliminate the need for developed, cognitive skillsets. It uses the work of others to simulate human output, except that it lacks grasp of nuance, contains grievous errors, and ultimately serves the goal of human beings being neurologically weaker due to the promise of the machine being better equipped than the humans using it would ever exert the effort to be. The people that use generative Al for art have no interest in being an artist; they simply want product to consume and forget about when the next piece of product goes by their eyes. The people that use generative Al to make music have no interest in being a musician; they simply want a machine to make them something to listen to until they get bored and want the machine to make some other disposable slop for them to pass the time with. The people that use generative Al to write things for them have no interest in writing. The people that use generative Al to find factoids have no interest in actual facts. The people that use generative Al to socialize have no interest in actual socialization. In every case, they’ve handed over the cognitive load of developing a necessary, creative human skillset to a machine that promises to ease the sweat equity cost of struggle. Using generative Al is like asking a machine to lift weights on your behalf and then calling yourself a bodybuilder when it’s done with the reps. You build nothing in terms of muscle, you are not stronger, you are not faster, you are not in better shape. You’re just deluding yourself while experiencing a slow decline due to self-inflicted atrophy.

  source

  • bulwark@lemmy.world ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Damn that hits the nail on the head. Especially that analogy of watching a robot lift weights on your behalf then claiming gains. It’s causing brain atrophy.

    source

    • tehn00bi@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      But that is what CEO’s want. They want to pay for a near super human to do all of the different skill sets ( hiring, firing, finance, entry level engineering, IT tickets, etc) and it looks like it is starting to work. Seems like solid engineering students graduating recently have all been struggling to land decent starting jobs. I’ll grant it’s not as simple as this explanation, but I really think the wealth class are going to be happy riding this flaming ship right down into the depths.

      source
  • GnuLinuxDude@lemmy.ml ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The people that use generative Al for art have no interest in being an artist; they simply want product to consume and forget about when the next piece of product goes by their eyes. The people that use generative Al to make music have no interest in being a musician; they simply want a machine to make them something to listen to until they get bored and want the machine to make some other disposable slop for them to pass the time with.

    My critique on this that the people who produce this stuff don’t have interest in it for its own sake. They only have interest in it to crowd out the people who actually do, and to produce a worse version of it in a much faster time than it would for someone with actual talent to do so. But the reason they produce it is for profit. Gunk up the search results with no-effort crap to get ad revenue. It is no different than “SEO.”

    Example: if you go onto YouTube right now and try to find any modern 30-60m long video that’s like “chill beats” or “1994 cyberpunk wave” or whatever other bullshit they pump out (once you start finding it you’ll find no shortage of it), you’ll notice that all of those uploaders only began as of about a year ago at most and produce a lot of videos (which youtube will happily prioritize to serve you) of identical sounding “music.” The people producing this don’t care about anything except making money. They’re happy to take stolen or plagiarized work that originated with humans, throw it into the AI slot machine, and produce something which somehow is no longer considered stolen or plagiarized. And the really egregious ones will link you to their Patreons.

    The story is the same with art, music, books, code, and anything else that actually requires creativity, intuition, and understanding.

    source

    • KnitWit@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I believe the OP was referring more to consumers of ai in the statement, as opposed to people trying to sell content or whatever, which would be more in line with what you’re saying. I agree with both perspectives and I think the Op i quoted probably would as well. I just thought it was a good description of some of the why ai sucks, but certainly nit all of it.

      source
  • OpenStars@discuss.online ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Everyone who uses AI is slowly committing suicide, check ✅

    source

    • latenightnoir@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨15⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Well, philosophical and epistemological suicide for now, but snowball it for a couple of decades and we may just reach the practical side, too…

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • merde@sh.itjust.works ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    the analogies used and the claims made are so dumb, they make me think that this is written by ai 🤣

    source
• RobotZap10000@feddit.nl ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Ed Zitron is one of the loudest opponents against the AI industry right now, and he continues to insist that “there is no real AI adoption.” The real problem, apparently, is that investors are getting duped. I would invite Zitron, and anyone else who holds the opinion that demand for AI is largely fictional, to open the app store on their phone on any day of the week and look at the top free apps charts. You could also check with any teacher, student, or software developer.

  A screen showing the Top Free Apps on the Apple App Store. ChatGPT is in first place.

  ChatGPT has some very impressive usage numbers, but the image tells on itself by being a free app. The conversion rate (percentage of people who start paying) is absolutely piss poor, with the very same Ed Zitron estimating it being at ~3% with 500.000.000 users. That also doesn’t bode well with the fact that OpenAI still loses money even on their $200/month subscribers. People use ChatGPT because it’s been spammed down their throats by the media that never question the sacred words of the executives (snake oil salesmen) that utter lunatic phrases like “AGI by 2025” (Such a quote exists somewhere, but I don’t remember if this year was used). People also use ChatGPT because it’s free and it’s hard to say no to get someone to do your homework for you for free.

  source

  • nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨47⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

    people currently don’t pay for it, because currently it’s free. most people aren’t using it for anything that requires a subscription.

    source
  • Electricd@lemmybefree.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    I would certainly pay for ChatGPT if it became paid only

    source

    • nutsack@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨45⁩ ⁨minutes⁩ ago

      you’re being downvoted but this is the reality of the market right now. it’s day 1 venture capital shit. lose money while gaining market share, and worry about making a profit later.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Regrettable_incident@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    I don’t need chatGPT etc for work, but I’ve used it a few times. It is indeed a very useful product. But most of the time I can get by without it and I kinda try to avoid using it for environmental reasons. We’re boiling the oceans fast enough as it is.

    source
  • AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    In house at my work, we’ve found ChatGPT to be fairly useless, too. Where Claude and Gemini seem to reign supreme.

    It seems like ChatGPT is the household name, but hardly the best performing.

    source

    • sykaster@feddit.nl ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      My thoughts exactly, I use Claude and find it much better than ChatGPT. Less hallucinations, more useful information

      source
  • lemmyknow@lemmy.today ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

    Idk that the average GPT user knows or cares about AGI. I think the appeal is getting information specifically tailored to you. Sure, I can go online and search for something. Try and find what I’m looking for, or close to it. Or I can ask AI, and it’ll give me text tailored exactly to my prompt. For instance, having to hope you can find someone with a problm similar to yours online, with a solution, vs. ChatGPT just tells you about your case specifically

    source
  • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I love how every single app on that list is an app I wouldn’t touch in my life

    source

    • nialv7@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Not even Google maps

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • Eagle0110@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Exactly, the users/installation count of such products are clearly a much more accurate indicator of the success of their marketing team, rather than their user’s perceived value in such products lol

    source
  • corbin@infosec.pub ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    That’s shifting the goalposts, and I also wouldn’t really trust Ed Zitron’s numbers when he gets a very simple thing like “there is no real AI adoption” plainly wrong. The financials of OpenAI and other AI-heavy companies are murky, but most tech startups run at a loss for a long time before they either turn a profit or get acquired.

    source

    • JeremyHuntQW12@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I wouldn’t really trust Ed Zitron’s math analysis when he gets a very simple thing like “there is no real AI adoption” plainly wrong

      Except he doesn’t say that. the author of this article simply made that up.

      There is a high usage rate (almost entirely ChatGPT btw, despite all the money sunk into AI by others like Google) but its all the free stuff and they are losing bucketloads of money at a rate that is rapidly accelerating.

      but most tech startups run at a loss for a long time before they either turn a profit or get acquired.

      There is no path to profitability.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• Tracaine@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I don’t hate AI. AI didn’t do anything. The people who use it wrong are the ones I hate. You don’t sue the knife that stabbed you in court, it was the human behind it that was the problem.

  source

  • Lucidlethargy@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The thing they created hates you. Trust me, it does.

    source
  • AmbitiousProcess@piefed.social ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    While true to a degree, I think the fact is that AI is just much more complex than a knife, and clearly has perverse incentives, which cause people to use it "wrong" more often than not.

    Sure, you can use a knife to cook just as you can use a knife to kill, but just as society encourages cooking and legally & morally discourages murder, then in the inverse, society encourages any shortcut that can get you to an end goal for the sake of profit, while not caring about personal growth, or the overall state of the world if everyone takes that same shortcut, and the AI technology is designed with the intent to be a shortcut rather than just a tool.

    The reason people use AI in so many damaging ways is not just because it is possible for the tool to be used that way, and some people don't care about others, it's that the tool is made with the intention of offloading your cognitive burden, doing things for you, and creating what can be used as a final product.

    It's like if generative AI models for image generation could only fill in colors on line art, nothing more. The scope of the harm they could cause is very limited, because you'd always require line art of the final product, which would require human labor, and thus prevent a lot of slop content from people not even willing to do that, and it would be tailored as an assistance tool for artists, rather than an entire creation tool for anyone.

    Contrast that with GenAI models that can generate entire images, or even videos, and they come with the explicit premise and design of creating the final content, with all line art, colors, shading, etc, with just a prompt. This directly encourages slop content, because to have it only do something like coloring in lines will require a much more complex setup to prevent it from simply creating the end product all at once on its own.

    We can even see how the cultural shifts around AI happened in line with how UX changed for AI tools. The original design for OpenAI's models was on "OpenAI Playground," where you'd have this large box with a bunch of sliders you could tweak, and the model would just continue the previous sentence you typed if you didn't word it like a conversation. It was designed to look like a tool, a research demo, and a mindless machine.

    Then, they released ChatGPT, and made it look more like a chat, and almost immediately, people began to humanize it, treating it as its own entity, a sort of semi-conscious figure, because it was "chatting" with them in an interface similar to how they might text with a friend.

    And now, ChatGPT's homepage is presented as just a simple search box, and lo and behold, suddenly the marketing has shifted to using ChatGPT not as a companion, but as a research tool (e.g. "deep research") and people have begun treating it more like a source of truth rather than just a thing talking to them.

    And even in models where there is extreme complexity to how you could manipulate them, and the many use cases they could be used for, interfaces are made as sleek and minimalistic as possible, to hide away any ability you might have to influence the result with real, human creativity.

    The tools might not be "evil" on their own, but when interfaces are designed the way they are, marketing speak is used how it is, and the profit motive incentivizes using them in the laziest way possible, bad outcomes are not just a side effect, they are a result by design.

    source

    • HarkMahlberg@kbin.earth ⁨6⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      This is fantastic description of Dark Patterns. Basically all the major AI products people use today are rife with them, but in insidiously subtle ways. Your point about minimal UX is a great example. Just because the interface is minimal does not mean it should be, and OpenAI ditched their slider-driven interface even though it gave the user far more control over the product.

      source
  • victorz@lemmy.world ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    But it’s when you promote the knife like it’s medicine rather than a weapon is when the shit turns sideways.

    source

    • Fedegenerate@lemmynsfw.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨hour⁩ ago

      Scalpel: Am I a joke to you?

      source
• MehBlah@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I don’t hate AI. I’m just waiting for it. Its not like this shit we have now is intelligent.

  source

  • Diurnambule@jlai.lu ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Yeah I hate that is is used for llm, when we tell ia I see Jarvis from iron man not a text generator.

    source

    • otacon239@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I’ve recently taken to considering Large Language Models like essay assistants. Sure, people will try and use it to replace the essay entirely, but in its useful and practical form, it’s good at correcting typos, organizing scattered thoughts, etc. Just like an English teacher reviewing an essay. They don’t necessarily know about the topic you’re writing about, but they can make sure it’s coherent.

      I’m far more excited for a future with things like Large Code or Math or Database models that are geared towards very particular tasks and the different models can rely on each other for the processes they need to take.

      I’m not sure what this will look like, but I expect a tremendous amount of carefully coordinated (not vibe-coded) frameworks would need to be made to support this kind of communication efficiently.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
• jaykrown@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I don’t hate AI, and I think broadly hating AI is pretty dumb. It’s a tool that can be used for beneficial things when used responsibly. It can also be used stupidly and for bad things. It’s the person using it who is the decider.

  source

  • ysjet@lemmy.world ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    The problem is that there’s basically no way to use it responsibly.

    source

    • elucubra@piefed.social ⁨2⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      I think there is. Letting the actual professionals guide, instead of the money people is a big step.

      Something like McDonnell, and later Boeing, basing all decisions on economic short gains, instead of engineering criteria.

      Bean counters shouldn't make decisions.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • AlecSadler@lemmy.blahaj.zone ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    I’ve definitely been pretty anti-AI, finding it kinda stupid and generally useless…

    …but we hired an AI researcher at my work (which I laughed at). But I cannot deny anymore that with the proper setups, configs, rules, blend of onsite / cloud resources etc. - workplace AI can be pretty fucking game changing. To the point where I went from campaigning against the changes because I felt they were a waste of time to where I am worried for my future job and am using agents 5-10 times a day to handle small bugfixes for me.

    I don’t know what will happen when the bubble pops though.

    source
• RedIce25@lemmy.world ⁨16⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Leave my boy Wheatley out of this

  source
• salty_chief@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Remember when Boomers complained about the internet. Now we have millennials complaining about AI.

  source
• richardmtanguay@lemmy.zip ⁨8⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  This reminds me of a robot character called SARA that I would see on a Brazilian family series As Aventuras De Poliana. :-)

  source